Who owns Haskin Park? The latest in the Google Fiber controversy

“Haskin Park was created by the plat that laid out the neighborhood surrounding it. plat-v-3700-p-268

As such, the city owns only an easement for the park, not the fee interest in the land. That is made clear by the case of Humble Oil and Refining v. Blankenburg, which concerned the right to lease minerals under the Townsite of Charlotte. One litigant claimed through the original developer who filed the plat laying out the townsite, and the other claimed through the town itself. humble-oil-v-blankenburg

John Whitsett, a concerned citizen, filed a Public Information Request for a copy of the deed by which the City holds title. No deed was forthcoming, but Mr. Whitsett did receive documents containing the following assertion:

“It is our position that the City of San Antonio has sufficient real property rights to authorize the placement of the hut under the conditions being considered and we specifically reject your premise that the City would need a deed from Mr. Lee (Quincy Lee was the developer laying out the neighborhood) in order to conduct this activity. I am sorry if you feel that this use will be an annoyance to you and your neighbors. “

If the City had a deed to Haskin Park, it would have produced it. If it thought it somehow otherwise had fee title, it would probably have explained that. Thus, we have an apparent admission that the City holds only an easement, presumably the park easement created by the above plat. By saying the City has the right to allow the Google Fiber hut, it is impliedly saying that a park easement allows the City to let private businesses conduct non-park-related activities in public parks.”

Read Kenneth Bennight’s full blog post here.